The decree on measures to ensure Russia's national security and protection of Russian citizens from criminal and other illegal activities and the application of special economic measures against Turkey

Vladimir Putin signed a decree "On measures to ensure the national security of the Russian Federation and the protection of Russian citizens from criminal and other illegal activities and the use of special economic measures against the Republic of Turkey."

November 28th, 2015 20:15

The text of the document:

In order to protect national security and national interests of the Russian Federation to protect Russian citizens from criminal and other illegal acts, and in accordance with the federal law of 30 December 2006 ? 281-FZ "On special economic measures" and on 28 December 2010 ? 390-FZ "On security" decree:

1. The authorities of the Russian Federation, federal government agencies, local authorities, legal entities, formed under the laws of the Russian Federation, organizations and individuals under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, in its work to proceed from the fact that in the Russian Federation input time:

a)

prohibition or restriction of foreign economic operations involving import into the Russian Federation of certain goods whose country of origin is the Republic of Turkey,

on a list established by the Government of the Russian Federation (except for goods imported for personal use to the extent permitted by law of the Eurasian Economic Union);

the

prohibition or restriction for organizations under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Turkey on the implementation of (provision) of certain types of work

(services) in the territory of the Russian Federation on a list established by the Government of the Russian Federation;

c)

prohibition for employers, customers of works (services) are not included in the list determined by the Government of the Russian Federation, to attract to January 1, 2016 in order to work, works (services) of workers citizens of the Republic of Turkey

who are not labor and (or) civil-legal relations with these employers, customers of works (services) as of December 31, 2015

2. Pause from 1 January 2016 in accordance with the Federal Law of July 15, 1995 ? 101-FZ "On international treaties of the Russian Federation", and paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Turkey on the terms of mutual trips of citizens the Russian Federation and citizens of the Republic of Turkey on May 12, 2010 action of the Agreement in respect of the journeys undertaken by citizens of the Turkish Republic, which are the owners of foreign passport, except citizens of the Republic of Turkey, who have a temporary residence permit or a residence permit on the territory of the Russian Federation and citizens of the Republic of Turkey sent to work in diplomatic missions and consular offices of the Republic of Turkey on the territory of the Russian Federation in possession of valid official and special passports, and their families.

3. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation in the established order the Republic of Turkey to send a notice of partial suspension of the Agreement, named in paragraph 2 of this Decree.

4. To establish that the tour operators and travel agents should refrain from implementing the citizens of the Russian Federation of the tourist product, include a visit to the Turkish Republic.

5. The Government of the Russian Federation:

a) define lists of goods, works (services) provided by subparagraphs "a" and "b" of paragraph 1 of this Decree;

to determine the list of employers, customers of works (services) provided by subparagraph "c" of paragraph 1 of this Decree;

c) to define the list of contracts concluded with organizations under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Turkey for the supply of goods (works, services) in respect of which special economic measures provided for in this Decree shall not apply;

d) adopt measures for the following:

a ban on charter air transportation between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey;

strengthening of control over the activities of the Turkish road transport on the territory of the Russian Federation in order to ensure safety;

strengthening of port control and monitoring to ensure transport safety Russian waters of sea ports in the Black Sea region, including the prevention of illegal residence and movement, and other marine vessels in the waters of Russian sea ports;

e) if necessary, make proposals to amend the period of validity or the nature of the special economic and other measures provided for by this Decree.

6. This Decree shall enter into force on the date of its publication and is valid until they cancel the special economic and other measures.

The Russians were (most likely) the ones who leaked the cabinet/military discussions in Turkey a few years ago (as well as other recordings like the Nuland one in Ukraine) so do not doubt their intelligence capabilities.

The funny thing is they've completely exposed the US for the liars they are (and Turkey) and given the comments from the Iraqi government it is obvious that the US government/military/industry has been supporting militants (like ISIS/Daesh/CIA goons) in smuggling oil through to Turkey. This is humiliating and damaging to Turkey, the USA and its partners in crime.

WIll be funny to see the Western spin on this, my guess is Erdogan's response will be comical.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The trade off between civil rights and security does seem to be swinging in favour of security.

A bit of perspective I think is useful. For example Mexican drug cartels have murdered 80000 people just to the south of the US. Admittedly, they probably had more reason than "let's just kill as many as we can before we get shot" types. Even so they put IS in the shade in terms of sheer numbers. Apparently there is a saying in Mexico, silver or lead? It's easy to see Mexico as corrupted with few redeeming features. But if faced with the choice between death and a bribe and no government protection I'm wondering who'd swing for the silver? The trump wants to build a wall of course...

I'm aware this can be seen as a distraction for the actual problem of IS affiliates attacking the west. I don't mean it to be. As I say it's about perspective rather than hysteria designed to limit hard won freedoms. I'm as red blooded as the next man in terms of killing bad people. Kill 'em all I say. No great loss.

I guess my point is whether isolationism has actually has ever worked? Can we afford to simply regard Islam (as opposed to fundamentalist Islam) as incompatible with the west? We could do and have done that and it hasn't really worked. Thing about the west is that we actually have a pretty good product to sell. Not perfect I grant you... But pretty good compared with the medieval view of the world. Hearts and minds and all that if we tread as carefully as we can. Sorry, I continue to be an optimist...

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

...I guess my point is whether isolationism has actually has ever worked? Can we afford to simply regard Islam (as opposed to fundamentalist Islam) as incompatible with the west? We could do and have done that and it hasn't really worked. Thing about the west is that we actually have a pretty good product to sell. Not perfect I grant you... But pretty good compared with the medieval view of the world. Hearts and minds and all that if we tread as carefully as we can. Sorry, I continue to be an optimist...

I remain of the view that this is a clash of civilisations - modern vs medieval. The two are clearly incompatible. This is not purely about religion but culture. Take the requirement for women to be covered from head to toe, in some cases even having to wear gloves. I'm not an expert in the Koran, but this rule is not in the Koran and was initially enforced in arabia as part of their culture. There other examples. European history has shown what happens when the two cultures collide and I expect the same again - a modern crusade that will lead to either assimilation or expulsion. Except that this time it is likely to be throughout the western world, rather than only Europe. The muslim fundamentalist are turning up the heat on the pressure cooker, so now it is only a matter of time until the explosion.

The best thing for the west is to become non reliant on oil and stop the money flow to the middle east. That should curtail the fundamentalist as waging a war requires money. The US provides a lot of support to Saudi Arabia, a despot country where a lot of the fundamentalist emanate. They (and Europe) are paying the price now in multiples. Once the money flow to the middle east stops, it will become a desert again as they have failed to diversify. They could have emulated Israel in how to transform the desert into a vibrant, diversified economy. But their tribal mentality doesn't support it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think we agree upon many points here Cobran. Especially regarding culture versus religion. Fundamentalist moslems (the sort that challenge our way of life aren't welcome) Moderate moslems however should be encouraged. They not only offer a diversified world view and a richness of cultural experience, they offer a way to defeat extremism. Extremism thrives when a particular group within a society become marginalised. If we marginalise all moslems then we provide succour to the extremists.(to paraphrase Walid Ali)

I'm unsure to where we could expel the home grown fundamentalists. New Zealand don't want their own criminals back for example.

Europe is a fantastic proving ground for policy I also agree. There have been several interesting periods when the might of Rome was challenged by some minorities ( most notably the Cathars and the Templars) and these were dealt with expediently. AKA they killed them all. Of course this is the medievalism that we both wish to avoid.

I'm not sure that Europe let alone the western world can afford another crusade. We have a majority of Moslems living in this country that I wouldn't call assimilated necessarily. That would imply that they drank, smoke and swore along with people such as myself. Rather they are moderate and not only accept but relish the secular Australian culture as it provides a means through which their daughters can bypass the medieval restrictions and gain an education.

The solution in my humble opinion is that justice must be seen to be done. I'm happy for every extremist f*ckwit to be bound by law for the remainder of their natural. But the law must be applied equally with every extremist (regardless of religion and/or culture) that threatens violence on religious/cultural grounds subject to the same treatment.

This would at least ensure that any claim to bias by extremists could be put to bed instantly.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Islamic State terrorist attack in Paris has probably contributed to the right wing nationalists in France winning 30% of the votes. Furthermore, the European refugee crisis is threatening the whole Schengen Agreement about borderless travel.

So the EU Deep State plans to federalise Europe step-by-step is off the rails. Right-wing political support is growing everywhere; UKIP is influencing mainstream politics in the UK, and Denmark has just voted down laws for adopting more EU regulations.

What will the hidden globalist elites do now? I think the Syrian crisis with the IS insurgence, and the associated refugee crisis in Europe will be dealt with very soon. And the measures will be tough.

The media elite has spent years feigning being horrified by Islamic State savagery, while never demanding strong action against them. At the same time, there has never been any interest in investigating how IS has sold the oil they steal or how they get arms and supplies. This will now change, and the sheeple must be indoctrinated to accept the justification for war against IS. Lots of media beat-up about the true horror of IS will start to appear.

I think there will also be strong EU pressure to repatriate refugees as soon as the political situation in Syria is stable. And that political stability can come about either by truce of by the destruction of IS.

Who will be the bad guy? Turkey is part of NATO and they also provide the closest geographical positions for military bases, from which anti-IS strikes can be deployed. So even though Turkey is probably the strongest clandestine supporter of IS (as a Sunni neo-Ottoman empire), I think Saudi Arabia will be painted the bad guy. Again, watch the mainstream media campaign revving up that narrative in the months to come...

The big uncertainty in all this is Russia. They play their own game. Turkey has set a precedence of perception: if you are a NATO member you can shoot down a Russian plane and Russia will be too scared to strike back. So will other NATO countries along the Russian border poke the Russian military bear with impunity?

That is unacceptable for Russia. It would not surprise me if Russia is planning to hit back very hard in some ways. According to Putin, Turkey *must* pay dearly and very much regret what they did to Russia.

Hmmm.... I wonder what will happen to Turkmen in northern Syria and Turkish allies in northern Irak over the next months?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I remain of the view that this is a clash of civilisations - modern vs medieval. The two are clearly incompatible. This is not purely about religion but culture. Take the requirement for women to be covered from head to toe, in some cases even having to wear gloves. I'm not an expert in the Koran, but this rule is not in the Koran and was initially enforced in arabia as part of their culture. There other examples. European history has shown what happens when the two cultures collide and I expect the same again - a modern crusade that will lead to either assimilation or expulsion. Except that this time it is likely to be throughout the western world, rather than only Europe. The muslim fundamentalist are turning up the heat on the pressure cooker, so now it is only a matter of time until the explosion.

The best thing for the west is to become non reliant on oil and stop the money flow to the middle east. That should curtail the fundamentalist as waging a war requires money. The US provides a lot of support to Saudi Arabia, a despot country where a lot of the fundamentalist emanate. They (and Europe) are paying the price now in multiples. Once the money flow to the middle east stops, it will become a desert again as they have failed to diversify. They could have emulated Israel in how to transform the desert into a vibrant, diversified economy. But their tribal mentality doesn't support it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I never get why the "anti Global Warming handouts" crowd, who also seem to dovetail with this sentiment a lot, don't look at measures which would remove the oil reliance in their own interests. They might not care about fossil fuels causing climate issues but they do tend to care about the middle east a lot and also tend to be pro nuclear weapon.

Why don't they come up with their own plan removing oil, that would be way more effective than just fighting against the greenies.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I never get why the "anti Global Warming handouts" crowd, who also seem to dovetail with this sentiment a lot, don't look at measures which would remove the oil reliance in their own interests. They might not care about fossil fuels causing climate issues but they do tend to care about the middle east a lot and also tend to be pro nuclear weapon.

Why don't they come up with their own plan removing oil, that would be way more effective than just fighting against the greenies.

They're avoiding purchasing oil from the middle east by producing their own, using shale. Why do you think the arabs have dropped the price of oil so much? It has been due to reduced demand and putting shale oil producers out of business. Use of fossil fuel will not stop until there is a viable alternative, which currently does not exist,

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"currently doesn't exist" seems a somewhat limited view considering, from memory, that Peak Oil book in the late nineties was also a libertarian / republican primary audience and peak oil even now seems more on the radar of the same people claiming global warming doesn't exist / does but is natural and can't be combatted.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"currently doesn't exist" seems a somewhat limited view considering, from memory, that Peak Oil book in the late nineties was also a libertarian / republican primary audience and peak oil even now seems more on the radar of the same people claiming global warming doesn't exist / does but is natural and can't be combatted.

Ok. Tell me what current alternatives are viable in terms of price, ability to produce energy consistently (instead of when the wind blows!), flexibility to carry anywhere?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

That is the point! Or do you want someone to create a new source of energy without funding and support and if they don't we'll just sit here with our dwindling resources?

The pebble style reactors seem a promising thing, why not go hard core supporting them rather than spending all your time and energy stopping other peoples ideas without offering an alternative!

Throughout history, it has been the market place and technology that have developed viable energy source, not governments. Take solar energy as an example. There has been countless $$$ of tax payers monies spent in subsidies on the industry and how effective has it been at replacing fossil fuels?! I've looked at the economics of installing solar on my house now that subsidies have been removed and I calculated that it would take me about 10 years to recover the investment. Guess what I've decided to do!

I'm no expert on pebble reactors, but a cursory search shows they've got what seems serious issues to overcome. So you're suggesting investing squillions of tax payers money for what could be yet another expensive flop. I'd rather take the proven method of private enterprise finding an alternative energy source through technological innovation. All risks & rewards to the inventor(s).